July 29, 2005
Does PDC Believe In Transparency Or Not?
Agency Silent On 'Communique' Public Records Request
A couple of weeks back, a local attorney delivered a "report" to the Portland Development Commission regarding accusations that the agency's chair somehow had influenced the decision to contract with a local public relations firm with which he already had connections.
We put the word "report" in quotes because, as we pointed out back then, it was nothing more than a two-paragraph memorandum (pdf) which offered no detail at all on how that determination was reached.
As we've said all along, we're perfectly willing to buy into the lawyer's conclusion that the alleged dots did not in fact connect. But we've argued that such buy-in is unfeasible if all we're given is the lawyer's word. Our position, we've said, is that he needed to show his work.
Back then, we wandered around in said lawyer's background not to argue that he isn't trustworthy, or to insinuate he was engaging in some sort of cover-up (something we don't, in fact, beleive), but because the fact that he didn't show his work means no one in either the public or the press can retrace his steps and confirm his conclusion.
(Although, we should point out, The Oregonian appears not to care, since their reporter on this story dutifully has refered to Tellam's say-nothing memo as a "report" just as the PDC itself has.)
For a matter regarding a public agency which is responsible for doing the public's business, we have argued that this is entirely unacceptable.
Look at it this way: What was being investigated (in part) was whether or not a decision was made in a non-transparent manner. Does it make any sense at all for the investigation itself to then be presented in a non-transparent manner?
No. It makes no sense whatsoever.
With that premise in mind, then, on Friday, July 15, we hand-delivered a public records request (pdf) to the front desk at PDC, following the procedure outlined by the agency (scroll down to "Requesting PDC Public Records").
What we asked for was simple: "All documents generated by Bradley F. Tellam (or his staff) in the production of his memo re: Chair Hennessee and the Clevenger/3 PR contracts."
In their procedures for such requests, PDC says that the PDC Legal Section will contact requesters "usually within 5 working days". While we understand the modifier "usually" in that statement, as of today, ten working days have passed without our receiving any response from the PDC Legal Section to our public records request.
Again, let us make this perfectly clear: We're willing to believe that Tellam's determination was correct. But in general matters regarding a public agency responsible for doing the public's business, and in a specific matter involving the issue of transparency, such investigations cannot rest entirely upon anyone's word -- be they a Bradley F. Tellam, a Richard M. Nixon, or a Jesus H. Christ.
Transparency requires of a public agency that it show its work. This extends to those to which they hand off the responsibility for independent investigations.
So, we post this item in the spirit of that very transparency, and strongly urge PDC to respond -- one way or the other -- to our public records request.
Comments (5)
Noah Brimhall on 29 Jul 2005
Good Work b!X! Asking for these public records is exactely the reason I am happy to have you here in Portland and I will continue to support your work. I really hope the PDC gets back to you about this soon because their reputation is at stake.
Behind the Scenes on 29 Jul 2005
FYI -
It appears that the failure to respond within seven working days to a records request is the same as a denial:
http://www.open-oregon.com/New_Pages/192-410.shtml
Section 192.465(2)
It also says you can file an appeal from that denial with the District Attorney. Its up to PDC to demonstrate how the records meet the requirements for keeping documents confidential. I suspect there is a reason they hired a lawyer to do the report and they will claim that it fits attorney-client communications.
The open-oregon site also has an online form for making records requests into a nice legal format.
pdc-staff on 29 Jul 2005
Touché!
You folks provide a great service to the citizens of Portland. Thank you for this post.
PDC continues to avoid transparency -or- accountability. Still unwilling to accept responsibility for their actions, if they keep up this continued arrogance, their future is doomed.
paul gronke on 29 Jul 2005
b!x,
Did you call them up?
Steve Schopp on 31 Jul 2005
If the PDC ever had genuine transparency much of their operation would come to a screeching halt due to illegitimate spending of tax dollars.
Consider the environment that spawned the bold misbehavior and poor judgment by Mazziotti and others.
The cavalier attitude towards the public dime is what lead to the fast and loose actions by PDC management.
Unfortunately it is nearly certain that the level of ethics and judgment demonstrated by Mazziotti permeated much of the more important decisions at the PDC involving many millions of dollars.
Case in point is the PDC orchestrated snow job to deliver tax dollars, infrastructure and zone changes for South Waterfront fat cats.
The resulting cost to taxpayers for prime River front development makes the food and beverage spending nothing.